English
19. The Nineteenth Chapter (186) 1. Discourse on Abandoning Defilements Does one abandon defilements of the past? Yes. Does one cease what has ceased, remove what has been removed, exhaust what has been exhausted, set what has set, completely set what has completely set? It should not be said thus... Does one abandon defilements of the past? Yes. But isn't the past ceased? Yes. If the past is ceased, then it should not be said that "one abandons defilements of the past." Does one abandon defilements of the past? Yes. But isn't the past non-existent? Yes. If the past is non-existent, then it should not be said that "one abandons defilements of the past." Does one abandon defilements of the future? Yes. Does one give birth to what is unborn, produce what is unproduced, bring into being what is unarisen, make manifest what is unmanifest? It should not be said thus... Does one abandon defilements of the future? Yes. But isn't the future unborn? Yes. If the future is unborn, then it should not be said that "one abandons defilements of the future." Does one abandon defilements of the future? Yes. But isn't the future non-existent? Yes. If the future is non-existent, then it should not be said that "one abandons defilements of the future." Does one abandon defilements of the present? Yes. Does one who is impassioned abandon passion, one who is hateful abandon hatred, one who is deluded abandon delusion, one who is defiled abandon defilements? It should not be said thus... Does one abandon passion with passion, hatred with hatred, delusion with delusion, defilements with defilements? It should not be said thus... Is passion associated with consciousness, and is the path associated with consciousness? Yes. Do two consciousnesses arise simultaneously? It should not be said thus... Is passion unwholesome, and is the path wholesome? Yes. Do wholesome and unwholesome, blameworthy and blameless, inferior and superior, dark and bright counterparts of phenomena come into direct confrontation? It should not be said thus... Do wholesome and unwholesome, blameworthy and blameless, inferior and superior, dark and bright counterparts of phenomena come into direct confrontation? Yes. But hasn't the Blessed One said... It is said – ‘‘These four, monks, are very, very far apart! Which four? Sky, monks, and earth – this is the first very, very far apart (...) therefore, the Dhamma of the good is far from the wicked.’’ Is there such a discourse? Yes. Then it should not be said – ‘‘skillful and unskillful (...) come into direct presence.’’ 831. Should it not be said – ‘‘one abandons past defilements, one abandons future defilements, one abandons present defilements’’? Yes. Are there no defilements to abandon? It should not be said thus (...) then one abandons past defilements, one abandons future defilements, one abandons present defilements. The discourse on abandoning defilements is concluded. 19. The Nineteenth Chapter (187) 2. Discourse on Emptiness 832. Is emptiness included in the aggregate of formations? Yes. Is the signless included in the aggregate of formations? It should not be said thus (...) Is emptiness included in the aggregate of formations? Yes. Is the desireless included in the aggregate of formations? It should not be said thus (...) Should the signless not be said to be ‘‘included in the aggregate of formations’’? Yes. Should emptiness not be said to be ‘‘included in the aggregate of formations’’? It should not be said thus (...) Should the desireless not be said to be ‘‘included in the aggregate of formations’’? Yes. Should emptiness not be said to be ‘‘included in the aggregate of formations’’? It should not be said thus (...). Is emptiness included in the aggregate of formations? Yes. Is the aggregate of formations not impermanent, not conditioned, not dependently arisen, not subject to decay, not subject to vanishing, not subject to dispassion, not subject to cessation, not subject to change? It should not be said thus (...) Is not the aggregate of formations impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to decay, subject to vanishing, subject to dispassion, subject to cessation, subject to change? Yes. If the aggregate of formations is impermanent (...) subject to change, then indeed it should not be said – ‘‘emptiness is included in the aggregate of formations’’. 833. The aggregate of form Is that emptiness included in the aggregate of formations? Yes. Is the emptiness of the aggregate of formations included in the aggregate of form? It should not be said so… … Is the emptiness of the aggregate of feeling… … of the aggregate of perception… of the aggregate of consciousness included in the aggregate of formations? Yes. Is the emptiness of the aggregate of formations included in the aggregate of consciousness? It should not be said so… … Should it not be said that the emptiness of the aggregate of formations is included in the aggregate of form? Yes. Should it not be said that the emptiness of the aggregate of form is included in the aggregate of formations? It should not be said so… … Should it not be said that the emptiness of the aggregate of formations is included in the aggregate of feeling… … in the aggregate of perception… in the aggregate of consciousness? Yes. Should it not be said that the emptiness of the aggregate of consciousness is included in the aggregate of formations? It should not be said so… … 834. Should it not be said that emptiness is included in the aggregate of formations? Yes. But has it not been said by the Blessed One: “Empty are these formations, monks, of self or of what belongs to self”? Is there such a discourse? Yes. Then emptiness is included in the aggregate of formations. The discourse on emptiness is finished. 19. The Nineteenth Chapter (188) 3 The Discourse on the Fruits of Asceticism 835. Is the fruit of asceticism unconditioned? Yes. Is Nibbāna a refuge, a shelter, a haven, a goal, the immutable, the deathless? It should not be said so… … Is the fruit of asceticism unconditioned, and Nibbāna unconditioned? Yes. Are there two unconditioned things? It should not be said so… … Are there two unconditioned things? Yes. Are there two refuges… … or are they distinct? It should not be said so… … 836. Is the fruit of asceticism unconditioned? Yes. Is asceticism unconditioned? It should not be said so… … Is asceticism conditioned? Yes. Is the fruit of asceticism conditioned? It should not be said so… … Is the fruit of stream-entry unconditioned? Yes. Is the path of stream-entry unconditioned? It should not be said thus…pe… Is the path of stream-entry conditioned? Yes. Is the fruit of stream-entry conditioned? It should not be said thus…pe…. Is the fruit of once-returning…pe… the fruit of non-returning…pe… the fruit of arahantship unconditioned? Yes. Is the path of arahantship unconditioned? It should not be said thus…pe… Is the path of arahantship conditioned? Yes. Is the fruit of arahantship conditioned? It should not be said thus…pe…. Is the fruit of stream-entry unconditioned? Is the fruit of once-returning…pe… Is the fruit of non-returning…pe… Is the fruit of arahantship unconditioned? Is Nibbāna unconditioned? Yes. Are there five unconditioned things? It should not be said thus…pe… Are there five unconditioned things? Yes. Are there five refuges…pe… intervening? It should not be said thus…pe…. The discourse on the fruits of recluseship is finished. 19. The Nineteenth Chapter (189) 4. Discourse on Merit-Transference 837. Is merit-transference unconditioned? Yes. Is Nibbāna a refuge, a shelter, a protection, a final resort, the immutable, the deathless? It should not be said thus…pe… Is merit-transference unconditioned? Is Nibbāna unconditioned? Yes. Are there two unconditioned things? It should not be said thus…pe… Are there two unconditioned things? Yes. Are there two refuges…pe… intervening? It should not be said thus…pe…. 838. Is the merit-transference of robes unconditioned? Yes. Is Nibbāna…pe… the deathless? It should not be said thus…pe… Is the merit-transference of robes unconditioned? Is Nibbāna unconditioned? Yes. Are there two unconditioned things? It should not be said thus…pe… Are there two unconditioned things? Yes. Are there two refuges…pe… intervening? It should not be said thus…pe… Is the merit-transference of almsfood…pe… of lodgings…pe… of requisites for the sick, medicine, and provisions unconditioned? Yes. Is Nibbāna…pe… the immutable, the deathless? It should not be said thus…pe… Is the merit-transference of requisites for the sick, medicine, and provisions unconditioned? Is Nibbāna unconditioned? Yes. Are there two unconditioned things? It should not be said thus…pe… Are there two unconditioned things? Yes. Are there two refuges…pe… intervening? It should not be said thus…pe…. The merit-transference of robes is unconditioned…pe… of almsfood…pe… of lodgings… The attainment of food... the attainment of requisites for the sick (medicine) is unconditioned. Is Nibbāna unconditioned? Yes. Are there five unconditioned things? It should not be said thus... Are there five unconditioned things? Yes. Are there five protections... or intervals? It should not be said thus... The attainment of the first jhāna is unconditioned. ...the second jhāna... the third jhāna... the fourth jhāna... the base of infinite space... the base of infinite consciousness... the base of nothingness... the base of neither perception nor non-perception... the path of stream-entry... the fruit of stream-entry... the path of once-returning... the fruit of once-returning... the path of non-returning... the fruit of non-returning... the path of arahantship... the fruit of arahantship—is the attainment unconditioned? Yes. Is Nibbāna... the unchangeable, the deathless? It should not be said thus... Is the attainment of the fruit of arahantship unconditioned, is Nibbāna unconditioned? Yes. Are there two unconditioned things? It should not be said thus...